About your Search

20100101
20100131
Search Results 0 to 6 of about 7
reform as a way to trim medicare spending to fund coverage expansion a lot of these voters were very suspicious of this. you see them getting mobilized in a way that's very unpredictable at the time. i think this was the political mistake. rather than looking to conservative policy elites in the capital, barack obama should have looked to who were those older white republican voters who didn't necessarily love bush, who were willing to give him a chance but who had a very different set of concerns from again those inside the belt way policy wons. i think not getting that visceral sense of concern that particularly a lot of older voters who didn't vote for him in the 2008 election or who stayed home, et cetera that was a big mistake he's still paying for and has exacted some costs in the form of those from the left being disillusioned as well as those on the right. it's a much more confusing landscape. >> i think there's a lot to that. i also think that something that the president said in his inaugural address that hasn't been widely quoted but i thought was extraordinarily shrewd, h
take effect in october, and leave untouched programs like medicare and social security, and national defense. white house spokesman robert gibbs said the cuts would be strategic. >> the president will cut programs that are duplicative or serve what he believes is no important purpose, and instead invest in, as families do, investments for the future. >> woodruff: the proposal would freeze $477 billion out of the $3.5 trillion budget, or about 17% of federal spending. it's designed to save $250 billion over the coming decade. republican leader mitch mcconnell criticized the idea as too small. >> freezing non-defense domestic discretionary spending would be a good idea. however, if you put into the baseline the stimulus, tarp, and you account for inflation, it's not nearly as big a step as the american people are asking us to take. >> woodruff: the president is expected to address the deficit, among other economic issues, including unemployment, in his state of the union message tomorrow night. in an interview with abc news' diane sawyer, mr. obama acknowledged some choices he will mak
compromising. an additional medicare tax and a compromise where you recognize the cost savings potentials, recognize the priorities of the president but at the same time move towards the house by having more progressive revenue raising other taxes like the medicare tax or a small millionaire's tax. >> ifill: what about that, josh bivens? >> some sort of compromise could be useful here. >> ifill: like what? >> i mean, one, have the senate bill move a little bit toward the house. but if you want to do some kind of cost sharing i think you have to actually target excessive benefits. i don't think the excise tax does it. one can imagine a way of constructing a thax that goes after plans that are generous in terms of actual generosity of coverage. >> ifill: what is an excessive benefit. >> that's a big problem too. one person's excessive benefits is another person's insulation from risk. you have people, you know, i'm enough of an economist to believe that people trade-off wages for these health insurance benefits. they've voted with their feet. they clearly value these benefits. excessive is
at effort, as many did today because they understand if y fail to act, social securi isoing broke. medicare is going brok it is t progressive to allow those prrams to fail. >> woouff: senator greg, why is this bipartisan tasforce idea that the o of you were pushing,hy was that the right way to go or w is it the righway to go? >> because thesessues are so big, judy, thayou can't adess them in a partisan way. you have to have evebody at the ble. everytng has to be on the table-- entitlemts and tax issu-- or otherwise the american peopldon't trust the sults. e american people inherently undersnd if it isn't bipaisan, it probably won't be fr. weet up this task force in a manner that not only w bipartisan but also requir super majories to report. 14 o18. so that ither side could gain the other. it required per majorities to pasit in the senate so body could game anybody. the results of thitask force woulbe seen as fair, honest and bipartisan, and wod have popular support which is vy important. any initiati that affects these types ofrograms like medicare, medicaid and tax. >> woodruff: if it was
'take the points clear. i think it's abo compromising. andditional medicare tax and a compromise whe you recognize the cost savings potentials, recognize the prioties of the president but at the same time mov towards the house byaving more progressive reven raisg other taxes like the medire tax or a small millionaire's tax. >> ifillwhat about that, sh bivens? >> some sort of coromise could useful here. >> ifill: li what? >> i mean, one, ha the nate bill move a little bit toward the hou. but if youant to do some ki of cost sharing i think you have to actually tget excessive befits. i n't think the excise tax does it. one can image a way of constructi a thax that goe after plans that are geners in terms of actual generosy of coverage. >> ifill: what is an eessive benefit. >> that's a biproblem too. one person's excesve benefits is anotr person's insulaon from risk. you have people, younow, i'm enough of an economist to beeve that people trade-off wages for the health insurance benets. they've voted th their feet. they clearly val these benefits. exceive is tough. but i would y if we are going to en
to raise taxes, we're going to cut half a trillion from medicare, affect veterans' care. i think we can do it better. >> ifill: republicans declared voters sent a clear message in yesterday-- that democrats need to slow down. >> i'm convinced now that no gamesmanship will be played by the other side with regard to future votes in the senate >> the american people have spoken. the people of massachusetts have spoken for the rest of america. stop this process. sit down and open transparent negotiations. let's begin again from the beginning. >> ifill: indeed, many senate democrats appeared chastened by the brown victory, which some predicted would affect every 2010 race. senate majority leader harry reid suggested voters are as concerned about the economy as they are about health care. >> first of all, we're not going to rush into anything. as you've heard, we're going to wait until the new senator arrives before we do anything more on health care. remember, the bill we passed in the senate is good for a year. there are many different things we can do to move forward on health care. we're not
. still, it grew faster than the nation's overall economy. a government study, by the centers for medicare and medicaid services, found health spending topped $2 trillion. that works out to an average of about $7,700 for every american. those are some of the day's main stories. i'll be back at the end of the program with a preview of what you'll find tonight on the newshour's website. but for now, back to judy. >> woodruff: information has emerged about a possible jordanian connection in the attack that killed seven americans at a cia operating base in afghanistan. gwen ifill has that story. >> ifill: new details surfaced today about the attack, a suicide bombing allegedly carried out by a double agent working with the u.s. the names of the victims have not been released by the cia, but family members have identified 3. 37-year old harold brown junior originally from massachusetts leaves behind a wife and three children. >> his concern was to make the world a better and safer place for everyone who lived here. i think that fueled his own commitment to the military and to our country and in
Search Results 0 to 6 of about 7

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)